Stay Informed

C4

In an appearance on the Family Research Council’s “Washington Watch” yesterday, Sen. Jim Inhofe deliberated whether President Obama is a terrorist supporter or a buffoon, and decided that he president is intentionally “supporting the enemy.”

“Never in my political career in my memory did it ever occur to me that we would have a president of the United States who would be doing things supporting the enemy,” the Oklahoma Republican said. “Our system isn’t set up for Congress to deal with this kind of a situation.”

Inhofe told FRC president Tony Perkins that he is even comfortable leaking information from classified briefings: “All of these hearings, these classified briefings like the one we had this morning, I almost don’t mind talking about what they said because they are all so orchestrated, they always have five or six people from the administration, all of them agreeing with the president.”

“People now are calling in on a regular basis and saying, you know what I knew this administration was incompetent but I believe this goes beyond incompetence, I believe some of it’s intentional, either they are working intentionally to undermine America or they simply have no clue whatsoever,” Perkins said.

Inhofe suggested that he agrees with Perkins that Obama is deliberately harming America.

“If I were to agree with that, I’d lose all credibility in going on because that is the first thing they’d accuse me of,” Inhofe responded. “But I’d have to tell you, those people have every reason to believe what they are believing now. This couldn’t just keep happening over and over again.”

Yesterday on his radio program, “Washington Watch,” FRC president Tony Perkins denounced the embassy’s decision.

“The rainbow flag over Israel — the last time they were flying that over Sodom and Gomorrah it didn’t work out so well,” Perkins said. “This administration is not just ignoring or indifferent to traditional values, it is hostile to them, it is hostile to the very things that made America great.”

Perkinbs also spoke to a caller who said President Obama is “Satan personified” and a “terrorist” who “threatened” House Speaker John Boehner “and his family” to keep him in check.

Perkins kept the allegation alive, telling the caller that “there could be something to that, I don’t know, I don’t think it’s come to that” while noting that “this president and his policies” have “dismantled the country morally and culturally.”

Texas Gov. Rick Perry’s comparison of homosexuality to alcoholism this week was widely regarded as a major political misstep … except, of course, by the fervently anti-gay pundits on MattBarber’s website BarbWire.

BarbWire senior editor Jeff Allen writes today that Perry’s comments defending the Texas GOP’s support for ex-gay therapy “demonstrate his resolute refusal to back down to the bullies of Big Gay” and should “inspire a few other Republicans to grow a spine.”

Of course, Perry finished in fifth place in the caucuses and later dropped out of the race.

The Los Angeles Times reported that Perry’s comments resulted in a “smattering of groans and hisses” from the crowd. Perhaps his fearless fortitude, displayed while speaking in the hostile territory of the “gay” Mecca of San Francisco, will inspire a few other Republicans to grow a spine — but don’t hold your breath.

…

During his last presidential bid in 2012, Perry also emphasized his Christian faith in a campaign advertisement entitled “Strong” that debuted late 2011 in Iowa. The spot condemned the military’s perilous repeal of the don’t-ask-don’t-tell policy which prevented open homosexuals from serving in the military.

“I’m not ashamed to admit that I’m a Christian, but you don’t need to be in the pew every Sunday to know there’s something wrong in this country when ‘gays’ can serve openly in the military but our kids can’t openly celebrate Christmas or pray in school,” Perry declared in the advertisement. And he also pledged to stand against the “liberal attacks on our religious heritage.”

Fortunately, Gov. Perry’s latest remarks demonstrate his resolute refusal to back down to the bullies of Big Gay. That’s what presidential poise under pressure looks like.

Maybe it was all a dream! How else, Pat Boone wonders in his WorldNetDaily column today, could America not see that “a secret cabal of Communist manipulators” had trained a “young black/white college student, originally school in Indonesia” to be a cunning politician after getting him "admitted to Columbia and then Harvard”?

Boone writes that following a stint as a community organizer, this “young anti-American man” in “an astonishing coup, was ‘elected’ president of the United States” despite the “absence of a valid birth certificate.”

The “audacious charlatan” governed with the help of his “fellow Marxists, socialists and Muslim activists,” Boone writes.

I don’t dream much, but when I do, it’s usually dramatic – and memorable. Did you ever have a dream so vivid, so stark, that it seemed real, even after you woke up?

That’s what happened to me last night. I had just finished reading Tom Fitton’s electrifying book “The Corruption Chronicles,” a factual, documented masterpiece. My dream was actually a nightmare, a horrifying, surreal vision of contemporary life in America that was so sickening and unbelievable that I woke up in a cold sweat. And the worst part is that I still, to this minute, can’t decide if it was a dream – or real!

I dreamed that a spell was cast over the whole United States, affecting almost all of its people, especially those of voting age.

A secretive cabal of Communist manipulators, trained in the malevolent disciplines and Machiavellian methods of Saul Alinsky, had taken an interest in a young black/white college student, originally schooled in Indonesia, who’d sought out Marxist professors (as he revealed later in his own autobiographical book) at Occidental College.

In this young Marxist they felt they had a potential candidate for high elective office, first at the state and then possibly on the national level. He had a good mind, was glib and articulate and, according to a fellow Marxist at Occidental, was surprisingly angry. He was ready to foment a total overthrow of what he called “the colonial oppressor of Third World countries”!

This cabal had lots of money, so they got the young man admitted to Columbia and then Harvard, where he somehow was maneuvered briefly into the president’s chair at the Harvard Law Review. He never wrote anything of record (except calling the Constitution “a flawed document”) or distinguished himself in any way, but it looked good on a future resume.

Then, in my dream, this young anti-American man had brief jobs as a “community organizer” in Chicago, utilizing the disruptive, divisive and deceptive tactics he’d learned from Alinsky, and then went in a blinding scramble from state senator in Illinois to the U.S. Senate for a couple of low-profile, near invisible years … and then, in an astonishing coup, was “elected” president of the United States!

I say “elected” because the electoral process was so corrupted by another Marxist organization named ACORN that the outcome would always be questioned.

Four years went by, he was re-elected, and systematically went about wrecking the constitutional structure of the nation, piling up trillions of unpayable debt on the hapless taxpayers, bamboozling and intimidating both houses of Congress, shredding American influence all over the world, appointing fellow Marxists, socialists and Muslim activists to 33 “czarships” (unconstitutional regulators answerable only to him and not to Congress), and in countless ways overturning and abandoning the rule of law in the country.

…

At this point, I woke up trembling, in a cold sweat, furious but weeping for my country. Surely it couldn’t be true; America could never let this happen! Our Congress would surely have acted long before an audacious charlatan could have literally taken over the government and bankrupted a nation, economically and morally! Surely they … surely the courts … surely the Constitution … surely the press … surely the millions of people on every level of American life would have risen up and … and … the smoking guns were everywhere, in plain sight, right out on the table. Any one of them would disqualify a man from the presidency! How many would it take?

In fact, Paul opposed the Senate immigration reform bill even after it was amended to include a border “surge” amendment, because he said the amendment — which Sen. John McCain said would give the U.S. the “most militarized border” since the Berlin Wall — didn’t go far enough. As the bill was being debated, Paul also played into right-wing fears by claiming that undocumented immigrants were being given greater rights than American citizens.

In an interview with the anti-immigrant website WorldNetDaily yesterday, Paul’s spokesman Brian Darling insisted that while Paul appeared on a conference call with a conservative immigration reform group this week, he did not “advocate for the passage of anything.”

Darling also disputed a press release from the pro-immigration group, the Partnership for a New American Economy, which announced that Sen. Paul was “throwing his political weight behind an establishment lobby effort to get Congress to reform the country’s immigration system this year.”

He told WND that Paul’s staff “never approved any Partnership press release that said Rand Paul was going to push for immigration reform legislation this year, and we specifically asked them not to put that in any press release.”

So there you have it: Paul supports immigration reform with words, but won’t vote for a reform bill or propose one himself.

“Sen. Rand Paul never embraced amnesty on the call,” his office stated in an email. “Sen. Paul has never advocated for amnesty in any other forum and he voted against the Senate immigration bill.

“As a matter of fact, Sen. Paul offered an amendment on the immigration bill last year to strengthen border security by forcing annual votes in Congress before any benefits from the bill were authorized,” the statement said.

…

A press release issued by Partnership for a New American Economy announced Paul joined Norquist “to talk about immigration reform and the Senator’s ideas to strengthen border security, reform existing immigration laws for employers and attempt to find common ground on smaller immigration related matters.”

The Washington Times published a story Wednesday on the conference call with the headline “Rand Paul throws weight behind immigration reform effort.” The Times said Paul, on the heels of House Majority Leader Eric Cantor’s stunning primary defeat, “on Wednesday waded deeper into an issue that has proved perilous to some of his GOP colleagues, throwing his political weight behind an establishment lobby effort to get Congress to reform the country’s immigration system this year.”

Brian Darling, a spokesman for Paul, told WND the Times story mischaracterized Paul’s position.

“He didn’t go on any call to advocate for the passage of anything,” Darling said. “He was just there to talk about his views on the issue, which he’s talked about a million times before.”

…

Darling told WND the Partnership for a New American Economy had sent a version of its press release to him, and it was supposed to be changed.

“The one I saw was totally different from the Partnership’s press release that I approved,” he said. “I did see one version of it, and the version they published is different. The version that said Rand Paul was on the call to push for immigration reform this year was not approved. Not only was it not approved, we flagged that and told them, do not publish that in any press release.”

He said Paul’s office “never approved any Partnership press release that said Rand Paul was going to push for immigration reform legislation this year, and we specifically asked them not to put that in any press release.”

Wisconsin Republican Glenn Grothman wants to stop his state from issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples: “Our country is declining on an almost daily basis. The Office of Vital Records has no business participating in legitimizing illegal and immoral marriages.”

Televangelist Rick Joyner likens David Brat to the “greatest prophets” who arose “when ancient Israel fell into its deepest debauchery.”

Mat Staver of Liberty Counsel pledges to “re-deliver” his group’s “petition to ‘Impeach Barack Obama, our lawless President’ to key members of Congress.”

American Family Association spokesman Bryan Fischer demands that the U.S. stop helping Muslim-majority countries until their citizens convert to Christianity.

Os Hillman explains why he thinks the Obama presidency is part of God’s judgment on America.

On his May 11 program on the station KCMO, while discussing the abduction of hundreds of schoolgirls in Nigeria, who just a few days earlier the president had sent a team of American specialists to help find, Kobach took a call from a listener who — channeling Newt Gingrich — explained her theory that Obama and his allies “don’t care much about Christians getting killed…because Christianity is considered a vestige of colonialism.”

“And white European people are mostly Christian and so there’s a kneejerk, idiotic sort of reflex response,” she said, adding that the media is biased toward Obama because he is black.

“You have to wonder what goes through the president’s mind when he makes these decisions to act or not to act,” Kobach speculated later in the conversation, adding, “it could be the neocolonialism that you began your point with.”

“We’ve never known who this guy is or where his heart is” and “still don’t know what motivates” him, he continued.

When the caller responded, “Well, whatever it is, it ain’t patriotism,” Kobach agreed, saying “Yeah, that seems to be the case.”

Caller: I think that the reason he doesn’t, that Obama and the whole bunch of them don’t care much about Christians getting killed — or Jews, needless to say, I mean Israel has been not important to the Obamaites — is because Christianity is considered a vestige of colonialism, which we all know is ‘bad, bad, bad, bad, bad in every way.’ And white European people are mostly Christian and so there’s a kneejerk, idiotic sort of reflex response.

And, you know, that’s the lady who called about the conspiracy. And unfortunately, there doesn’t even need to be a conspiracy, as you said, the libs just dominate the media and nobody has to pressure them to do or say anything. I mean, that’s just literally how they feel: ‘Obama, black, equals good.’ So, you know, that’s that.

…

Kobach: You have to wonder what goes through the president’s mind when he makes these decisions to act or not to act, but it certainly seems…

Caller: You don’t have to wonder. It’s what the most recent polls is.

Kobach: Well, that may be. I don’t know. It could be polling, it could be the neocolonialism that you began your point with.

Caller: It all works together.

Kobach: It could be — who knows what he’s thinking. But that’s the thing, we’ve never known who this guy is or where his heart is. George Bush, for all his faults, you knew who George Bush was. He’s an open book, you didn’t have a sense that George Bush would come out with something that would surprise us. Obama, I still don’t know what motivates President Obama. It’s a strange thing. But I digress.

Last week, I saw a screening of “Obvious Child,” the new rom-com starring Jenny Slate in which the main character gets an abortion and makes some dark jokes about it and, surprise, ends up okay.

A couple of the questions at the Q&A following the screening with Slate and the film’s director Gillian Robespierre were about the anti-choice reaction to the film. A few days before the film hit wide release, there hadn’t been much, except for a few initial whimpersof dissent when the film screened at Sundance.

But that’s starting to change as anti-choice groups get wind of the movie and find it to be promoting “evil” and putting America “beyond redemption.”

Arina Grossu, director of the Center for Human Dignity at the Family Research Council, told The Daily Signal that she is “appalled that the evil of abortion is now the subject of a ‘romantic comedy.’

…

Grossu, who has not yet seen the film, has a different take.

“The movie attempts to gloss over the gravity of abortion,” she said. “But no amount of acting or short-lived laughs can take away the reality that abortion is a grave moral evil that kills one person and wounds the other.”

Jillian Kay Melchior, writing in the National Review Online, bashes the film for “making such a difficult physical and metaphysical decision into a cheap joke, with dead babies as the punchline.”

Obvious Child is kind of funny sometimes but not that funny — which is not the film’s main problem. Obvious Child is reprehensible because, through tasteless and unsubtle humor, it trivializes something that’s of grave importance for pro-choice and pro-life women alike.

…

Robespierre does no favor to women by making such a difficult physical and metaphysical decision into a cheap joke, with dead babies as the punchline. In trivializing abortion so radically, she infantilizes women and undermines the feminism she purports to endorse.

LifeSiteNews went with sarcasm: “Finally, a movie that presents the murder of an innocent as the laugh riot it is!”

The feminist film critics can exhale now. Someone has finally concocted their dream movie: an "abortion comedy." Because apparently nothing sounds funnier than an unplanned one-night stand and a courageous destruction of God's most beautiful and most innocent creation.

It's called "Obvious Child." Feminist lingo sells this monstrosity.

…

Rolling Stone magazine described one scene of allegedly hilarious "empowerment" between female characters. "You're going to kill it," Donna's best friend Nellie says before a standup comedy set the night before her abortion. "Tomorrow I am," Donna replies, and "the two unravel in sheepish giggles.

If America laughs at this, America is beyond redemption.

…

Of course, to sell the movie, they oddly claim this abortion-advocating movie doesn't have an agenda. "Our film is not an agenda movie in any way," Slate told Rolling Stone. "The whole point is that women have this procedure, and they should have it safely, and it's a part of life. It doesn't have to be this giant obelisk sticking out." That is not an agenda, no siree.

A little murder is a part of life. A little life matters not at all.

Feminists like these movie-makers don't see a moral dilemma. They see abortion as a natural part of the daily grind. You wake up, you get an abortion, you have a cheeseburger. The critics call this a "refreshing matter-of-factness" about abortion.

It can also be described as feminist nihilism. The selfishness and autonomy of the woman is paramount, and the accidental baby is just cannon fodder. When the murder of the innocents is celebrated as comedy, civil society is destroyed.

Of course, with the exception of Melchior, none of these critics seem to have actually seen the movie that Bozell claims will destroy America.

End Times broadcaster Rick Wiles is pretty sure America is about to collapse, and it may come as soon as this year.

“The takedown of the constitutional republic of the United States of America is in full motion in 2014, this is it,” Wiles said yesterday on TruNews. “The Illuminati Free Masons are determined to dismantle the original republican form of government in order to finalize the transformation of this country into a godless, pagan cesspool of Free Mason fascism.”

He added that officials in “the Obamanista communist regime in the White House” are attacking “the American people from every direction: homosexual rights, gun confiscation, illegal immigrant amnesty and so on.”

While The AFA said they declined the donation, the other two anti-gay groups both processed the donation.

AFA spokesman Bryan Fischer used the opportunity to compare Milk to serial killer Jeffrey Dahmer: “Speaking to The Wire, AFA’s Director of Issues Analysis Bryan Fischer said that the very existence of the Harvey Milk stamp was akin to ‘honoring Jeffrey Dahmer on a postage stamp designed to honor the culinary arts.’”

How much do anti-gay groups hate the new Harvey Milk stamps from the U.S. Postal Service? One organization refused to even open a mailed donation to their cause using one such stamp as postage. Staying true to their announcement that they would boycott all mail with the Milk stamps, the American Family Association told The Wire that the organization had mailed back our attempted $5 donation to their anti-gay group unopened. Speaking to The Wire, AFA's Director of Issues Analysis Bryan Fischer said that the very existence of the Harvey Milk stamp was akin to "honoring Jeffrey Dahmer on a postage stamp designed to honor the culinary arts." That's because Fischer and the AFA, citing a line from a biography of Milk, believe that Milk was a sexual predator. "He is not somebody that should ever be honored on a postage stamp," Fischer said.

In an email to The Wire, AFA Special Projects director Randy Sharp said that the group marked our $5 donation "'Return to Sender' and returned it to the post office the next day." We still haven't received the rejected donation at Wire HQ, but Sharp included photo evidence (above) of the unopened donation on its way to a somewhat-expected round trip. Since announcing their boycott in late May, Fischer told us that the organization has received "several dozen" pieces of mail with Harvey Milk stamps on them. Unlike our attempted donation, few of those letters came with a return address. "There has been a juvenile effort to tweak us on this," Fischer added. The unopened, orphaned letters are currently sitting in a box in the AFA's offices.

…

Two other anti-gay groups (who, to be perfectly clear, did not pledge to boycott the stamps) are indeed accepting mailed donations with the Milk stamp, based on our experiment: Focus on the Family and the Family Research Council both processed The Wire's mailed $5 donations to their organizations, based on the records of this writer's slightly lighter bank accounts. Focus on the Family declined to comment on the stamps and on their newest donors; we'll let you know if the Family Research Council returns our request for comment.

President Obama is the chosen one … “the chosen destroyer of America,” that is.

Writing today for Renew America, conservative talk show host Laurie Roth rants against “radical Communist/Islamist” Obama’s plans to “destroy America,” “control the entire world” and “enslave” us all through his coming Islamic caliphate.

Obama doesn't have a dream to destroy America and make her disappear, but rather to enslave, control, and manipulate the people and all our assets. All those who resist his agenda will be destroyed. His stated views written and spoken for his whole "fake out" career have been to be the leader of an international movement and control the entire world with international laws.

Step one is to seize and redistribute all wealth, make America a mass of amorality, and crush real morality inspired by the God of the Holy Bible. Obama is a radical Communist/Islamist and has always hated what the real America represents. Christians, conservatives, and patriots must go, so must her spirit and real history of greatness.

Obama intends to make this transformation happen through clear and thought-out methodology. He has never just had a dream or philosophy he operates from, but detailed plans and international Islamic support. He has always mysteriously had billions of dollars in backing. It is most clear that Obama, from birth, was the chosen destroyer of America. Believe what you want, but the large sea of facts support this, from the massive millions spent to hide all Obama's documents – falsifying his birth records, use of false social security cards, and hiding college records. Think about it a second. Have you ever heard of any U.S. president ever spending millions to hide every detail of his life from the people?

We see Obama organizing and enforcing a tectonic shift through the Islamic lead caliphate, with the goal of controlling the entire world one day. We have watched Obama side with Islamic dictator after dictator – exposing again and again his real faith in Allah and Muhammad, not the Holy Bible and Jesus Christ. Think of the endless amount of corrupt and criminal dictators and terrorist groups he has boldly backed – Zelaya, Morsi, giving aid, and comfort to the Taliban, employing Muslim Brotherhood members through out his staff on and on it goes. He always sides against the Christians and Jews and for Islamic radicals.

That’s why it comes as such a surprise that a “mainstream conservative think tank” like the Family Research Council today promoted a bizarre Before It’s News article suggesting President Obama is filled with the “spirit of the Antichrist.”

The story claims the decision to raise the “flag of the LGBT Mafia” is proof that “the spirit of the Antichrist” is behind President Obama’s “deep-seated hatred of God, the Holy Bible and the Christian faith.”

Obama loves to spit in the face of scripture

In what could accurately be described as Obama’s greatest slap in the face to the Holy God of Israel, the LGBT flag was raised over the US Embassy in Israel. This is not done to support the LGBT Mafia. This was done to show Obama’s contempt for the Holy Jewish Scriptures. The book of Leviticus condemns in no uncertain terms men lying with each other.

“If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them.” Leviticus 20:13

Todd Starnes from Radio Fox News reported today that “the U.S. ambassador to Israel hoisted a gay pride flag over the American embassy in what is believed to be a groundbreaking moment. “Proudly flying the colors,” Ambassador Dan Shapiro wrote on the embassy’s Facebook page. He posted a photograph showing a rainbow colored flag flying alongside the American flag outside the embassy in Tel Aviv.

And God destroyed Sodom.

“For the first time in history, the U.S. Embassy in Tel Aviv has raised the Pride flag together with our American flag,” Shapiro wrote. “We are proud to join with the municipality of Tel Aviv-Yafo and its residents in celebrating LGBT Pride Week.”

So the Obama Administration publicly endorses and affirms the gay rights movement. Meanwhile, American military personnel are being ordered to remove Bibles from their desks and Bible verses from their walls — lest they be accused of publicly endorsing or affirming Christianity.” (end report)

Did you catch that last part? Barack Obama has ordered the US Military to remove all traces of their Christian faith, but defiantly hoists the flag of the LGBT Mafia to fly in Israel and nearly equal with the American flag. These are the actions of someone with a deep-seated hatred of God, the Holy Bible and the Christian faith.

This is the spirit of Antichrist. The prophecies are beginning to be fulfilled.

Paul Gosar, the Republican congressman from Arizona who recently called for the impeachment of Attorney General Eric Holder, told WorldNetDaily’s Greg Corombos yesterday that Holder should be impeached over Benghazi, immigration, Fast & Furious, Guantanamo Bay and “violating criminal smuggling laws.”

He also pointed to House Majority Leader Eric Cantor’s primary defeat as a reason that congressional Republicans should pursue Holder’s impeachment: “This is growing by leaps and bounds. People are fed up, we saw the election last night, people are scared and they are angry.”

Russell Moore, who heads the SBC’s Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission, hosted Rick Warren, David Platt, and Samuel Rodriguez for a June 9 panel on religious freedom in America through the lens of the Hobby Lobby case pending before the U.S. Supreme Court.

According to an account by Tom Strode in the Baptist Press, Rodriguez, who heads the National Hispanic Christian Leadership Conference, warned, “Today’s complacency is tomorrow’s captivity. The firewall against secular totalitarianism is religious liberty and religious pluralism.”

“Secular totalitarianism” in this context is the requirement, being challenged in the Hobby Lobby case, that for-profit businesses provide insurance coverage that includes contraception methods to which the company’s owners have religious objections.

“The justices will decide whether “there is the freedom to dissent and the freedom to accommodate these conscientious objections in the governing of people’s lives and the running of their businesses,” Moore said. “This will have everything to do with everything that your church does for the next 100 years.”

“I’m spending all of my time right now making sure that we stay out of jail,” [Moore] told the audience. “But there is one thing worse than going to jail, and that’s staying out of jail and sacrificing the gospel of Jesus Christ.”

Warren responded, “This issue may take – just as it did with Martin Luther King – it may take some pastors going to jail. I’m in.”

Inflammatory charges about religious persecution can lead to an angrier and more divisive political arena. If you believe your political opponents are actually out to take away your religious freedom, shut down your church, and literally criminalize Christianity—goals that some Religious Right figures attribute to political liberals—you have little reason to treat your opponents civilly or engage in a search for constructive common ground or compromise. Creating that kind of environment is not good for our country.

It is possible to have a vigorous debate about political issues and about the separation of church and state without resorting to falsehoods about religious persecution.

The panel wasn’t a total bust, apparently. Unlike some Religious Right leaders, who claim that religious liberty protections applyonly to Christians – or to a particular subset of Christians – news reports indicate that Rodriguez, Warren, and Moore said Christians should promote religious liberty for everyone in the context of religious pluralism. We don’t say this often about these guys, but we agree.

Kansas Secretary of State Kris Kobach — who doubles as an influential anti-immigrant and anti-voting-rights activist — flirted with the far-right conspiracy theory that President Obama is secretly a Muslim on his radio program last month.

Discussing the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom’s annual report, Kobach claimed that the Obama administration is ignoring the persecution of Christians in many Muslim countries, an issue that he said Americans are overlooking.

“Is it because the whole issue of Islam is something that we just don’t talk about because some people have questioned what exactly the president’s religious faith is?” he asked.

“When it comes to this issue it doesn’t matter what the president’s religious beliefs are,” he added, using the classic strategy of GOP politicians who encourage the “Obama is a Muslim” myth while never quite affirming it.

Republican congressmen Steve King and Steve Stockman chatted with the far-right website WorldNetDaily yesterday, where they praised Eric Cantor’s GOP primary defeat and blamed President Obama for an increase in border crossings by young people, mainly from Central America.

King and Stockman agreed that Obama is using “a Cloward-Piven maneuver” to “flood” the country with immigrants in order to increase the share of the Democratic vote, particularly in Texas.

Stockman called Obama a “Leninist,” while King said that the U.S. could “send in George Patton and the Third Army” as in “the Battle of the Bulge.”

“I do feel this attempt to flood the border with illegals is a playing out of the Cloward-Piven theory,” said Rep. Steve King, R-Iowa.

“If you don’t see them bring reinforcements down there to seal the border, that means that, yes, it’s a Cloward-Piven maneuver to flood the country until we get to the point where we are an open-borders country that welcomes everybody, legal and illegal,” he told WND.

Rep. Steve Stockman, R-Texas, agreed that Obama – who studied the chaos strategy at Columbia, according to a classmate – “is trying to do a Cloward-Piven thing with the border.”

He said it’s “an open secret Obama is trying to flood Texas with illegals to make it into a blue state,” with a Democrat majority.

“If we lose Texas, and it becomes like California, then the Republicans lose the chance of ever getting a Republican elected president,” the Texas lawmaker warned.

King agreed that one of the aims of the illegal-alien flood is to turn Texas into a Democrat state.

“You or I could shut that thing down in less than a week,” he said. “Instead of busing and flying illegals out of Texas, you fly enforcement people in.”

King said that while the U.S. is spending $7 a mile to defend the border, “we need to take people to plug the leak.”

“It’s the Battle of the Bulge down there, and you send in George Patton and the Third Army to relieve the surrounded 101st Airborne,” King said.

…

King said the shocking primary defeat Tuesday of House Majority Leader Rep. Eric Cantor in Virginia was about immigration.

“The voters stepped up and supported a candidate who has done an excellent job of articulating how important it is to restore the rule of law as a component of American exceptionalism,” he said, referring to tea-party candidate David Brat.

Cantor has expressed support for the principles of Obama’s proposed DREAM Act, which would grant amnesty to illegal aliens who came to the U.S. as children.

“The establishment will try to spin this, but Cantor’s loss reflects a voter rejection of amnesty, and it should put the brakes on any effort to move amnesty legislation in the House,” King said.

Stockman said the “key to Cantor losing was that the conservatives – including talk radio – united behind one candidate instead of what happened in my race where you had different people on our side supporting different GOP candidates.”

Perry is far from the only Republican figure to have expressed this view.

Another former GOP presidential candidate who is also considering a second run, Gov. Mike Huckabee, likened homosexuality to alcoholism in a 2009 interview with Esquire:

Huckabee says he doesn't know if homosexuality is inborn, but he believes you can control the behavior. He compares homosexuality to obesity or alcoholism: "Some people have a predisposition to alcoholism. Does that mean they're not responsible for getting drunk? No."

Late last month, Gun Owners of America director Larry Pratt and Andrew Mangione of the Association of Mature American Citizens gave us an interesting peak into the internal fighting within the GOP.

In a May 31 conversation on Pratt’s Gun Owners Radio Hour, the two conservative activists agreed on many things — including a visceral hatred of the Affordable Care Act and a fear that President Obama will send “goon squads” after people who fail to report gun ownership to their insurance companies. (Mangione’s group was founded as a conservative alternative to the AARP after the AARP got behind the health care reform).

But things got contentious when Pratt brought up his frequently-expressed anger at Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, who he thinks hasn’t done enough to obstruct President Obama , and declared, “If I lived in Kentucky, I’ll tell you right now, I’d vote for the liberal Democrat just to get rid of Mitch McConnell out of leadership in the Republican Party, where he does so much damage,” adding, “he is poison, pure and simple.”

Mangione, aghast, responded, “So you’d rather lose the seat than have a Republican, regardless of how pure he is on the conservative scale.”

“You’d rather have the seat go to a Democrat, you’d rather give the seat to the people who brought you Obamacare because of your personal dislike of this Republican?” he continued. “That’s why we got Obamacare, that’s why we got another four years of Obama. You’re talking crazy, sir, with all due respect.”

Pratt responded that “Mitch McConnell is the reason we got Obamacare,” to which Mangione replied that McConnell successfully denied health care reform a single Republican vote in the Senate and gave the GOP an election issue that has lasted for years.

DeLay told the Washington Times’ Andy Parks today that far-right challenger David Brat’s victory was a “spiritual revival” and a sign that pastors and “a lot of Christians that had never been elections before got involved” in politics.

“I’m not trying to be arrogant or a know-it-all but this is what I’ve been calling for well over a year now: spiritual revival and a revolution for the Constitution. I saw this as a manifestation of that,” DeLay said. “As I travel around the country what I hear from people, particularly Christians, is that they want to bring God back into the public arena, they want a revolution for the Constitution, they want constitutional government and they have a huge thirst for leadership.”

DeLay also described Cantor’s defeat as a loss for the progressive movement and the separation of church and state. Cantor, the only Jewish Republican in Congress, was actually a reliable Religious Right ally.

“People of faith are standing up now and they’re saying no more, enough is enough, we’re going to fight for what we believe in, we’re going to fight for our Christian — Judeo-Christian — values and we’re not going to take it anymore,” DeLay told Parks. “We need to defeat those who want to get God out of the [public] square and it’s happening, it happened last night with the Brat-Cantor race.”